David G Johnston wrote
> Well, that is half right anyway. UNLOGGED tables obey checkpoints just
> like any other table. The missing feature is an option to leaved restored
> the last checkpoint. Instead, not knowing whether there were changes
> since the last checkpoint, the system truncated the relation.
>
> What use case is there for a behavior that the last checkpoint data is
> left on the relation upon restarting - not knowing whether it was possible
> the other data could have been written subsequent?
If is possible to restore the table at last checkpoint state that will be
more than enough. I don't care about the changes since last checkpoint, I am
willing to lose those changes. There are use cases where is acceptable to
lose some data, for example in a cache system, it is not a big issue if we
lose some cached data.
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.nabble.com/unlogged-tables-tp4985453p5845650.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.